|
Post by Helen Dagner on Mar 30, 2011 20:07:56 GMT -5
Lilly's unflattering account of you in her book is already making waves within the Occk community, with several people who know you privately expressing confusion about Lilly's motivations for criticizing you, and questioning the accuracy of the other information and her interpretation of certain events outlined in her book. Lilly, for instance, puts herself in the Occk ,when very clearly she has no business being there, people familiar with the case think her agenda was only to take a stab at discrediting you. I for one feel she never interviewed anyone but Cathy and Terri and it would not surprise me if Cathy did more than proof read, like maybe she gave some money towards the publishing of the book, as Lilly's attacking, and her saying things like the police put you on permanent ignor,{lol} has there ever been a case were any civillian ever had so much contact--With any LE in a Serial Killing case-NO- NEVER! Then her not including the updated info on John and slaming him as a suspect,and naming McKinney as a suspect, however not offering any type of proof,because there is absolutely no evidence that points to him. I think the woman { if she really is one}, has some deep mental problems, she could never of gotten that book published by any publisher but herself, As It is a poorly wrtten piece of third rate fiction at best.It insults the intelligence and integrity of Law Enforcement. PS-Lilly I am one of the Cops who you said permanently put Helen on ignore {Retired} I can remember at times I sent Helen 120 emails in one month in fact she answer one of them with,"are we having an electronic affair by way of email?" Every Cop I know of respects Helen and her dedication to the Oakland County Child Murders,that is something you Dear Lilly will never experience! Xxxx Xxxxx Ph-248-Xxx-xxxx
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Mar 31, 2011 0:58:13 GMT -5
Oh, boy, can hardly wait to read how the crime was solved.....;>) By Lilly and gang. lol Thanks for sharing.Dave
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 20:17:10 GMT -5
Well, I've only made it thru the first 3 chapters so far..and I'm not sure where the hell this is all going. Don't tell me! lol What the Dear Lilly is throwing out some hefty clues, but good grief. I especially loved the wild reference to McKinney and his wife and their wild sex escapades. OMG I've been trying to take a few notes as I read along. Who is the "Man from Mt Clemens who confessed before his suicide" that she referred to in chapter 1? It's not Norberg. Don't tell me if she's going to reveal that later, but I doubt it. Did they ever find Douglas Bennett do you know, ever? ----- Original Message ----- Matt
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 21:19:29 GMT -5
Oh...well then that explains it I think. I do believe the only thing I"ve read that was highlighted so far was about McKinney. Let me get through some more and maybe it will make more sense to me. THe reading is so choppy and disjointed, and like one of the reviews said, the punctuation can make it hard to read. Plus I really dont' follow the blogs anymore so I dont know all the characters. I'd rather concentrate on the research and the facts. However I don't see much of that in this book. I tried to give up BS for Lent. (........and I am reading the whole thing) ----- Original Message ----- Dale
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 21:22:37 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm realizing that quickly. They need to get out of Cass Corridor. This book sucks! ED ----- Original Message -----
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 21:26:32 GMT -5
She doesn't list John's last name, does she? That would be hilarious. I think it's just so bizarre that you really brought in McKinney in the whole thing, and she flipped it to make him the suspect. Can't wait to see how she pulls this one together. lol ----- Original Message -----Geo
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 21:30:20 GMT -5
Remember where she talks about the oodles of time Terri has put into this. For you, are you talking about in the prologue where she's talking about "Her" yelling on the blogs and suing LE? ----- Original Message ----- Mike
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 21:59:23 GMT -5
Ugh, God I can't keep up with all these threads and BS. I'm surprised Cathy is posting on them. Can you give me the cliff notes? Apparently Cathy believes this book?Or she has gone insane. Bob ----- Original Message -----
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 22:03:50 GMT -5
Do you really think Cathy is nutty, or just desperate? Her viewpoint was SO different than any internet babble, that I value it alot more. But now that she has hooked up with Topix she seems to have no value at all, I know when she went with Busch it tunred bad, but is she realy totally nutty? ----- Original Message ----- Joe
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 22:05:50 GMT -5
What do you mean hurt? Physically? Is Cathy, Tim's Cathy? ----- Original Message ----- Sue
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 22:09:05 GMT -5
As far as this latest Topix posts. They are probably just paranoid. That part of the forum may had been down for a day. This happens on all web sites. Sometimes maintainance sometimes for other reasons. I really doubt the FBI or anyone else has anything to do with it.
Rita
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 2, 2011 22:12:56 GMT -5
I don't want to say Cathy is nuts but I think she is very mislead by Terri and Lilly. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 3, 2011 7:41:20 GMT -5
Lilly gives hints in her book that she was a good looking girl. She had been some good 'bait' in the Cass. With her personal interaction with Richard Lawson and Ted Lamborgine she never describes being attached or ever threatened in any way in her days in the Cass by them. There are no indications that these men ever did anything to girls. The Chris Busch bust was also specified as sex acts with little boys no girls involved or least the news didn't specify it. So my question is that this little girl living on Marlborough is the only girl victim of this entire Cass/Fox ring? Doesn't that seem kind of odd? Is this just to fit it into the OCCK? Lilly tries to come along with a book that puts it altogether just like some are wishing it was? Mark
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 3, 2011 14:12:53 GMT -5
Well so much for John McKinney being the only artist suspect. One difference between the two is that John looks a hell of a lot more like the OCCK sketch than McKinney and matches the witness descriptions as well. It seems like he had all the time in the world to do the child hunting also. I believe McKinney's schedule was too busy for this on the side. So long as Lilly has a best seller and gets the attention, I guess it all has a purpose. Don
|
|
|
Post by Helen Dagner on Apr 3, 2011 17:22:24 GMT -5
Helen I agree with some your email postings. How can Lilly say there is nothing to John and that you are a nut in her book but still Inspector71 is throwing all kinds of hints that actually point to John's family? Did everyone miss this? Is Hollywood son some how involved with these murders? Is Mary the one in McKinney's mystery woman sketch? I think someone on Topix must explain this since they think they know so much! Frank
|
|